Consistently losing lock at 20nm in F-15.

[AJ.eightFive]

With a target locked up BVR in either RWS or TWS modes I am consistently losing lock at 20nm regardless of height, speed or angle-off. Is anyone else experiencing this radar "blindspot"?

[Kula66]

Yep ... not sure at about 20 miles, but certainly locking up at 40miles, the radar now keeps dropping the lock numerous times before firing point is reached at 16-18miles, even though the target doesn't appear to be dodging or jamming or outside gimbles or scan cone or anything else I can think of ...

[Weta43]

This isn't a new bug though, I remember posting in a thread where someone was complaining about this & I confirmed that it had been happening to me too in 1.0

[AJ.eightFive]

So it is a bug then?... not a "feature" of the F-15C's radar?

[Weta43]

Happens on the Su27 too

 

Actually I think I remember GGTharos saying there is no "F-15 Radar" or "Su27 Radar" in LO.

They all have the same radar (model), just tweaked for various parameters (& there probably isn't a "drop lock at 'n.00'km" parameter to tweak.)

[Wags]

With a target locked up BVR in either RWS or TWS modes I am consistently losing lock at 20nm regardless of height, speed or angle-off. Is anyone else experiencing this radar "blindspot"?

 

I just ran a test of this is 1.12a and could not reproduce it.

 

Player in F-15C at 20k headon with a MiG-23 also at 20k. Ran TWS and STT locks from 60 to 1 nm without any dropped tracks.

 

Can you please be more specific? Aircraft types? Did they have ECM? What was altitude delta between the two aircraft? Was the target maneuvering? Were there other aircraft along the track bearing that were using ECM?

 

-Matt

[Kula66]

Ok I think I MAY have a handle on this ... my theory: its the target moving out of the scan cone vertically. In TWS, if I lock a target in the middle of the scan cone, then move the cone up the track drops. Or if I'm way above a target and fly toward it with my scan cone fixed I drop a track because to keep lock I need to manually crank the scan cone down as I close.

[EDIT: If I manually crank the cone down, it keeps locked! 15 v 33, online, 20k' foot difference ... ]

 

I didn't hink this was how TWS worked? I thought TWS peeked at the target regularly to update the track? This is its BIG advantage!!!

[Weta43]

I used to fly a mission I made to learn how to dodge missiles.

In a Su27 @ 2000m flying straight on at an F14 which is on a reciprocal heading & also at 2000m from about 120km separation. I'd get the lock, they'd be flying towards me straight & level then the steering / target indicator circle would start to flash & the lock would drop. manouver the Target designator over the other plane & lock again then all was well.

 

I'll see if I can find the earlier thread.

[GGTharos]

No, TWS befor 1.12 was working as if it was an AESA radar.

 

The F-15's radar issupposed to keep the scan zone centered on the PDT by itself, AFAIK, but

it wasn't possible to implement this in the time allotted.

[Kula66]

So now you have to manually track the target with the scan cone or lose lock ... sorry GGT, this is rubbish! TWS scans the cone AND keeps track of locked targets ... thats why its called Track while scan!

[Weta43]

Don't want to be pedantic, but track while scan does not implicity mean track outside the radar scan cone, while scanning.

 

Also - I found a thread from 1.0 which seems to me to be a more specific instance of either the same or a very similar bug

 

http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?t=11110&highlight=lock

 

Sound similar to you guys?

[Kula66]

Don't want to be pedantic, but track while scan does not implicity mean track outside the radar scan cone, while scanning.

QUOTE]

 

Please feel free to be pedantic :)

Agreed ... I have no knowledge of the working of the 63, but it would seem a big restriction - negating many of its advantages.

[Weta43]

I don't know enough about the radar to say which it is, but I would have thought that if the radar is mechanically scanned, TWS should stop at the sacn cone boundary, but if electronically scanned, TWS could continue beyond that boundary (by just flipping a beam or potion of the beam over that way)

Anyway, this part of was Gazehounds posts "It seems that AI tomcats set to excellent can drop your radar lock by flying straight at you and not maneuvering (or jamming of course!). This happens often in BVR engagements at close range as well as long, nose-on and without the player maneuveing, at all altitudes, and when the F14 is not lower than you even.Its the manner in which I am losing lock on them that concerns me, at medium-close range, lower alt, head on, always excellent AI tomcat..// The original post was prompted by me just out side the NEZ, firing, losing lock, locking again, firing, losing lock, lock again, fire a third, lose lock and die (aim-7)."

This from 1.0

He seemed to actualy have his radar turn off after loosing lock at distance, but that doesn't happen to me, I just lose lock.

[Kula66]

So Wags, what do you think - should a mechanically scanned TWS radar be able to keep track of targets outside the scan cone?

[GGTharos]

No, it doesn't track outside the scan cone. It's supposed to keep the scan cone centered on the PDT on its own though, which isn't implemented in LOMAC. That means you need to work a little harder to maintain a bug on a contact, and you may just want to flat out go to STT at closer ranges (which is in fact RL procedure). This is why TWS isn't mean to engage widely separated targets, wether by Azimuth or altitude.

[Kula66]

So rather than leave it as is (over modelled) ... its now modelled missing automatic tracking - under modelled - broken.

 

What source is "why TWS isn't mean to engage widely separated targets" ... not something I've read.

[Pilotasso]

No, TWS befor 1.12 was working as if it was an AESA radar.

 

AESA LOL, thats realistic. its been implemented on real F-15's ;)

 

 

The F-15's radar issupposed to keep the scan zone centered on the PDT by itself, AFAIK, but

it wasn't possible to implement this in the time allotted.

 

Yes I was wondering that it would be intelligent to spare the pilot that work. And yes its responsible for most lookdown lock breaks. Its very difficult to keep it within viewcone on these condtitions.

[Kula66]

So look down TWS shots from high alt are now going to be nigh-on impossible to keep lock ... isn't this the Eagles forte?

[Wags]

So Wags, what do you think - should a mechanically scanned TWS radar be able to keep track of targets outside the scan cone?

 

No, it should not. As George correctly pointed out, a DTWS scan should center on the PDT. Given that the code does not currently support this, the player must manually center the TWS scan volume.

 

-Matt

[AJ.eightFive]

Interesting comments, I'll try and work the antenae elevation more judiciously and see if I can avoid losing the track and report back. I'm just working off memory right now, but I didn't think you could adjust the elevation while a PDT is locked... I guess that could be my problem.

[Wags]

So look down TWS shots from high alt are now going to be nigh-on impossible to keep lock ... isn't this the Eagles forte?

 

Not at all, you just need to manually keep track of your vertical scan volume. I've been having no problem with this. A more difficult situation are short-range crossing targets being kept in the TWS volume azimuth if you're narrowed your scan.

 

-Matt

[Kula66]

Ok guys ... Thanks for your patience in explaining it to me ... I guess I just need more practice! I guess the problem is keeping multiple targets in the scan cone!

 

Any plans on improving the 63s modelling in the future?

[GGTharos]

It's definitely challenging, especially if you need to maneuver! When you see the target come close, just switch to STT, save yourself the trouble.

 

I don't know if the 63 will be improved. I -suspect- at some point in time it may be, if ED decides to port the 15 into the new 'pit tech and AFM, and the new sensor/systems tech that would undoubtedly come with the F-16.

 

I certainly hope that will happen :)

[Kula66]

Glad to get to the bottom of it.

I think the change is going to fox a few people .... is this documented? ie, the implications of the scan cone changes ... because thats all I've see ...nothing about the need for manual tracking of the target.

 

"just switch to STT, save yourself the trouble." And give a lock warning ... this is one of the few advantages left for the Eagle!

[GGTharos]

Trust me, at 10nm you want STT :P There's simply no point in worrying about it at that point, unless you're coming up on some unsuspecting aircraft's tail, in which case you're not worried he'll maneuver out of scan zone anyway.

 

 

PS: Also, thanks Wags for the input :)